1) Montreal says "no" because this is a bad trade.
2) Chicago says "hell no" because the organization will not trade away two symbols of the Chicago renaissance.

This just might be the worst ACGM post I've seen yet, barring obvious trolls.

Are you not entertained?!? Isn't this why you are here??!!

Lol!! Can you be more specific?

The renaissance is done. They're going back to the dark ages with Keith's and Seabrook's contracts.

AM I NOT MERCIFUL?!!

Even with Chicago retaining, four years from now the Habs would have 29.27 tied up in four guys, none of whom are forwards, and all of them 35 or over.

Ew



Bad for everyone.

Lol the CBA is expiring in 2 yrs. With 2 compliance buyouts I can use them on who ever I want. Also for all I know Weber, Seabrook and Keith might retire before the contract is up. Cap circumvention is not on me, it's on NSH and CHI. I got 2 1sts in my pocket though

Which makes this trade even worse.

No it doesn't. Keith and Seabrook on the 2nd pairing makes my D better right now. CHI is responsible for their salary if they retire. Basically I'm trading Drouin and Petry for 2 1sts and with the chance of them being top 10 picks. No one will give 2 1sts for Drouin and Petry straight up.

my boss thinks I come to work to...well work. I actually come to work for the computer and free access to the internet.

MY MAN!

How so? They weren't 35 when they signed the deals.

seabrook and Keith ntc are in full effect. waiving from their home in Chicago to Montreal, probably not realistic

Very fair point. There's nothing anyone can do if they want to stay there and drag the team down and keep losing for another 5 yrs. That's why I want both, familiarity with eachother might convince them for a fresh start.

i think what they are trying to say is this trade is from the last Millennium .
Trade just dont happen like this anymore unless a third team is involved .

MTL cant take both Keith and Seabrook but there are a lot of teams who could use a Seabrook with retained cap.

Cap circumvention doesnt apply only to that. It applies to any contract that hasn't expired at the time a player decides to hang them up regardless their age. Actually to be more clear, I'd be on the hook for a small % of Keith's and Weber's contracts, the majority CHI and NSH pays. Seabrook would be 100% CHI's burden cause he signed it after the last CBA.

This is ACGM. How boring would it be to think inside the box with such a fun tool. You say MTL can't have both Keith and Seabrook, but the cap remains the same if I keep Drouin and Petry. Chicago has been piling up on some SOLID D prospects, CHI has to shed DK and BS anyway sooner rather than later.

I'd just like to know if this is something the majority of CHI fans would be willing to do?

term matters

Drouin is young and his contract is a gift ,you're offering a 33 and 35 year old with 5 and 6 years left .
you're ignoring Context and just looking at his year

that means we are committed to 3 D into their late 30's early 40's with 20m cap a year tied up in them until 2023 then 14.6 until 2024 .
its to much to commit to players older then Weber with that kind of term

Sorry bro I was never on the Drouin wagon. Hated that trade since day 1. This factor plays a big role on our difference of opinions.

Like I mentioned before, 2 of Weber, Keith and Seabrook would be victims to the 2 compliance buyouts I'm entitled to at the next CBA.

I'm doing this trade mainly for the 2 1st rounders. I hope CHI thinks of Drouin as highly as you do

what we think of him matters 0/100% he's a younger player on a better contract you'd have to be Naive to dispute that fact .
he's 23 and got 10 pts in 14 games with 6 PP points signed for 5 years at 5.5 m

you're offering up CHI old Work horses at 33 and 35 years old on 5-6 year deals at 5.5-6.8m.
its almost insulting

you keep looking for Reasons to make poor moves that handcuff our team for the next 5-6 years ontop of the Weber and Price deal.
No MTL fan thinks this is even an option .

Billy...compliance buyouts. Do you know what that means?